Fountains of Youth – Classic trout flies that have withstood the test of time … flies that remain “forever young”
by Rusty Dunn
“Match the hatch” is a cornerstone of fly fishing. Successful flies are those that imitate food of a feeding trout, but how exact must that imitation be? A crude approximation? A detailed facsimile? Opinions vary widely and are often strongly held. “Presentationists” maintain that the fly itself is of lesser importance, because success lies in how an angler presents the fly. They emphasize imitation of insect behavior over insect form (profile, color, size, anatomy, materials, etc.). “Imitationists”, on the other hand, maintain that flies should mirror the natural in detail. They assume that presentations are excellent but believe that trout are more often deceived when a fly closely mimics the natural. Imitationists emphasize insect form over insect behavior. Which group is correct? That’s for you to decide. Better start deliberations soon, however, because you may be puzzled and uncertain even after decades of thoughtful experimentation.
Consider two examples of the presentation vs. imitation debate. Ernie Schwiebert (1931-2005) was one of America’s most knowledgeable and accomplished fly anglers. His 1955 book Matching the Hatch includes 101 flies needed onstream to imitate common mayflies. His 1978 article in Fly Fisherman magazine includes 40 flies to imitate common ants alone! Even committed imitationists might question Schwiebert’s need for such abundance. At the other end of the spectrum, George La Branche (1875-1961) is widely acknowledged as a founder of American presentationists. His influential 1914 book The Dry Fly and Fast Water argues that action and movement of a fly is paramount, and the specific fly itself is much less important:
“A great part of the imitation must be produced by the angler himself while actually fishing the stream.”
La Branche’s book contains only eight fly patterns, about which he comments:
“I rarely use over six. If I were compelled to do so, I could get along very well with one – the Whirling Dun.”
One fly for all situations? Even committed presentationists might question the sparseness of La Branche’s fly box. Fortunately, most anglers are somewhere in the middle of the imitation vs. presentation spectrum, and you must find your own place of comfort.
La Branche’s favorite fly, the Whirling Dun, dates to the very beginnings of angling. Charles Cotton described the first Whirling Dun in The Complete Angler (1676), but historians are undecided on the insect that it imitates. A great variety of Whirling Duns have been published since Cotton, and the diversity of insects they imitate make “Whirling Dun” almost a general style rather than a specific pattern. Common features of Whirling Duns include a relatively large body size, an upright profile of divided wings suggesting mayflies, a brownish yellow, yellowish gray, or gray body color, and ginger or dun hackle. Theodore Gordon noted so many Whirling Dun designs – including four when visiting a single fly shop – that he collected them as examples of variation in fly tying. Imitationists argue that the diversity of flies imitates the diversity of natural mayflies. Presentationists argue that the flies are interchangeable and that each is successful in skilled hands.
George La Branche’s favorite Whirling Dun is similar to Hendrickson and Quill Gordon mayflies. Patrick McCafferty, whose book Aquatic Entomology (1981) is the definitive work on North American mayflies, identified Whirling Duns as two species of the genus Leptophlebia (common names Whirling Dun, Whirling Blue Dun, Blue Quill, Borcher’s Drake, Black Quill, Brown Quill, and Palefoot). If you see mayflies on the wing and view yourself as an imitationist, select a matching fly from one of the many fly boxes in your vest. If, on the other hand, you view yourself as a presentationist, grab a Whirling Dun from the lone box in your shirt pocket and take pleasure in George La Branche’s back-to-basics simplicity.
Copyright 2024, Rusty Dunn
Whirling Dun
La Branche concluded that a forward tilt of the wings improves effectiveness of the Whirling Dun.
|
Hook:
|
Dry fly, #10 – #12
|
|
Thread:
|
Yellow
|
|
Wings:
|
Starling or duck quill slips, upright, divided, and tilted forward ~30º toward the eye
|
|
Tail:
|
Ginger or light brown hackle fibers
|
|
Tag:
|
Two turns of flat gold tinsel
|
|
Body:
|
Muskrat underfur or mole fur
|
|
Hackle:
|
Ginger or light brown rooster, hackled heavily for turbulent waters
|
Whirling Dun
Leave a Comment
Last Updated: February 5, 2024 by Drew Kasel
by Rusty Dunn
“Match the hatch” is a cornerstone of fly fishing. Successful flies are those that imitate food of a feeding trout, but how exact must that imitation be? A crude approximation? A detailed facsimile? Opinions vary widely and are often strongly held. “Presentationists” maintain that the fly itself is of lesser importance, because success lies in how an angler presents the fly. They emphasize imitation of insect behavior over insect form (profile, color, size, anatomy, materials, etc.). “Imitationists”, on the other hand, maintain that flies should mirror the natural in detail. They assume that presentations are excellent but believe that trout are more often deceived when a fly closely mimics the natural. Imitationists emphasize insect form over insect behavior. Which group is correct? That’s for you to decide. Better start deliberations soon, however, because you may be puzzled and uncertain even after decades of thoughtful experimentation.
Consider two examples of the presentation vs. imitation debate. Ernie Schwiebert (1931-2005) was one of America’s most knowledgeable and accomplished fly anglers. His 1955 book Matching the Hatch includes 101 flies needed onstream to imitate common mayflies. His 1978 article in Fly Fisherman magazine includes 40 flies to imitate common ants alone! Even committed imitationists might question Schwiebert’s need for such abundance. At the other end of the spectrum, George La Branche (1875-1961) is widely acknowledged as a founder of American presentationists. His influential 1914 book The Dry Fly and Fast Water argues that action and movement of a fly is paramount, and the specific fly itself is much less important:
“A great part of the imitation must be produced by the angler himself while actually fishing the stream.”
La Branche’s book contains only eight fly patterns, about which he comments:
“I rarely use over six. If I were compelled to do so, I could get along very well with one – the Whirling Dun.”
One fly for all situations? Even committed presentationists might question the sparseness of La Branche’s fly box. Fortunately, most anglers are somewhere in the middle of the imitation vs. presentation spectrum, and you must find your own place of comfort.
La Branche’s favorite fly, the Whirling Dun, dates to the very beginnings of angling. Charles Cotton described the first Whirling Dun in The Complete Angler (1676), but historians are undecided on the insect that it imitates. A great variety of Whirling Duns have been published since Cotton, and the diversity of insects they imitate make “Whirling Dun” almost a general style rather than a specific pattern. Common features of Whirling Duns include a relatively large body size, an upright profile of divided wings suggesting mayflies, a brownish yellow, yellowish gray, or gray body color, and ginger or dun hackle. Theodore Gordon noted so many Whirling Dun designs – including four when visiting a single fly shop – that he collected them as examples of variation in fly tying. Imitationists argue that the diversity of flies imitates the diversity of natural mayflies. Presentationists argue that the flies are interchangeable and that each is successful in skilled hands.
George La Branche’s favorite Whirling Dun is similar to Hendrickson and Quill Gordon mayflies. Patrick McCafferty, whose book Aquatic Entomology (1981) is the definitive work on North American mayflies, identified Whirling Duns as two species of the genus Leptophlebia (common names Whirling Dun, Whirling Blue Dun, Blue Quill, Borcher’s Drake, Black Quill, Brown Quill, and Palefoot). If you see mayflies on the wing and view yourself as an imitationist, select a matching fly from one of the many fly boxes in your vest. If, on the other hand, you view yourself as a presentationist, grab a Whirling Dun from the lone box in your shirt pocket and take pleasure in George La Branche’s back-to-basics simplicity.
Copyright 2024, Rusty Dunn
Whirling Dun
La Branche concluded that a forward tilt of the wings improves effectiveness of the Whirling Dun.
Hook:
Dry fly, #10 – #12
Thread:
Yellow
Wings:
Starling or duck quill slips, upright, divided, and tilted forward ~30º toward the eye
Tail:
Ginger or light brown hackle fibers
Tag:
Two turns of flat gold tinsel
Body:
Muskrat underfur or mole fur
Hackle:
Ginger or light brown rooster, hackled heavily for turbulent waters
Share this:
Category: Fly Tying, Rusty Dunn Fountains of Youth
Recent Posts
Categories